Re: RFD: informal proposal

[Matthew Woodcraft <mattheww@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Anthony Towns wrote:
>There are two issues here. One is to work out direction most people
>want to go in. The other is to make sure we don't make fundamental
>changes to ourselves with signficant dissent.

What about other cases where a supermajority is required -- eg, the
technical committee overruling a maintainer?


Suppose a package breaks horribly, and a developer submits a bug report
with a proposed fix A. The package's maintainer says she won't implement
A, and proposes fix B. The submitter doesn't like B, and the question
ends up being assigned to the technical committee.

All members of the committee believe that both A and B are fine
solutions, and feel no need for further discussion (D). They vote
sincerely:

4  A B D
3  B A D

Should this situation be treated as satisfying the 3:1 majority
requirement for the committee to overrule the maintainer?

-M-